This is a blog to show off my wargaming toys, projects, and to discuss anything that I have a whim for at that time.
I am currently going back and making my print format larger and trying to make the pictures bigger to make it easier on the eyes. But you can always click on the pictures to see a larger image of it.
Enjoy!

Current Gaming Projects

Friday, November 29, 2013

In
writing about nuclear depth bombs in my previous entries has started to make me
think back of the 1965 classical movie, “The Bedford Incident”.If you are interested in Cold War dramas,
this is one to add to “the must see” list.It stars several heavy hitter actors, Richard Widmark,
Sidney Poitier, Eric Portman, and Martin Balsam.

I
don’t want to give too much away with it, but it about a US destroyer, the USS
Bedford, pursuing a Soviet submarine in the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK)
gap.Richard Widmark is the tough,
demanding captain that pushing his men to the breaking point.Sidney Poitier is a civilian reporter that
was given permission to interview the captain at sea.Eric Portman is an NATO advisor on the ship
that is a former WWII U-Boat commander. Finally, Martin Balsam is a naval
reservist doctor that has been called to duty on aboard the ship.

I
got this comment on my last entry and as I started to type up a reply, I
realized that it was rather lengthy, so I decided to make it a separate
entry.(Hope you don’t mind,
Benoit!)

Below
is Benoit’s comment:

“Very interesting but if:

"I am fairly confident that Thatcher would have never authorized the use
of the NDB’s during the Falklands conflict"

then, why did she support to bring them there? I cannot imagine she was not
aware of the embedded NBD's. What is your opinion?

Kind regards,

Benoit”

So
here is my reply:

My
opinion is fairly much in line with the official MoD’s document, as it is the
only logical reason for sending the NDB’s to the Falklands Conflict.

Thatcher
would have most certainly had known of their existence.I also believe that even with her reputation
as the ‘Iron Lady’ and regardless of the ultra-left’s opinion of her, she was
smart enough to know that the use of nuclear weapons against a Third World
nation that had no nuclear weapons and opposed no global or Home Islands threat
would have been not only been political suicide, but national suicide for the UK in all
future global relations, if not to provide an excuse for the Warsaw Pact the
use for military intervention into the conflict.The USSR was neutral to the conflict as the
Argentine junta was furiously anti-communist, but the use of a nuclear device
would have sent them in to panic. I also believe that she probably
pushed the MoD to address the issue to relocate the NDB’s to the deep magazine
ships so not to violate the Treaty of Tlatelolco.

I am
sure that her MoD's advisors explained the reasons for needing to keep the NDB’s
with the task force and that she agreed with them.How hard they would had to persuade her
would be a difficult question to answer, but with her history of a hard stance,
I would say, “probably not much at all.”

The
logic with keeping the NDB’s with the task force was two main reasons, which
were also covered in the MoD’s document.The first one is related to the actual operational timeline for the
mission to retake the Falklands islands.As stated, had the task force stopped at the Ascension Island to also to
off-load the NDB’s, they would have lost an additional 36 hours,
estimated.This would have meant that
operations would have delayed two more days.With the sever winter season approaching fast, this was a critical
factor.Had they waited, and not knowing
how the weather would be like, it was very likely that they would have to call
off the operation without reaching a final objective (forcing the Argentine
forces into a position to call for surrender.)Had the task force failed to reach that objective before the winter called
off the operations, The UK might have been force into a treaty with Argentina
to accept their claim to the islands and to forced into an agreement similar to
China at that time with Hong Kong.The
second part to this actual operational timeline was that by sitting at the
Ascension Islands two more days could have possibly allowed the Argentine
forces to spot the route of the task force and to intercept it with their
submarines.While in reflection this
turn out to be a false fear, but for the protection of the task force it could
not be overlooked.

The
second reason is the UK’s commitment to NATO.While looking back, we could see that there was not a great chance of
war between the NATO vs. Warsaw Pact during the period, but it was always a
threat.Keep in mind that the
international war game, Able Archer 1983, was only about 18 months later and there
are conflicting accounts on how close we came to a war with the Warsaw Pact
over that. (Actually, this would even make a cool campaign tie-in for a post Falklands game and excuse to do a USSR naval campaign!) Had the task force off loaded
their NDB’s at Ascension Island or the Home Islands, if a war would have broke
out between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, the task force would have been in
trouble.Not only would they have been
without a much needed resource for destroying ballistic missile submarines
(better to have an assured kill, verse a crippled sub that can still launch
before being hit again), but it had to sailed to Ascension Islands first and
take roughly 60 hours or less to reload the NDB’s.It could also be possible that the Soviet
intelligence could figure out that the NDB’s were located there and set up a
trap for the task force.

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

﻿One of the things that is talked about
in hush tones about the Falklands Conflict is the deployment of nuclear weapons
by the British with their task force.This of course is done for good reasons, one they could have been
violation of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which makes Latin America a nuclear
weapons “Free Zone”, and secondly the public relations backlash if they did
confirmed that nuclear weapons were indeed with the task force.Even today, the Ministry of Defence (MoD)
official statement is that they can either confirm or deny the presence of
nuclear weapons, but that the task force was instructed not to enter the
territorial waters of the Falkland Islands with their nuclear weapons
(violating the Treaty of Tlatelolco).But in an official document from the MoD states the nuclear weapons that
were part of the task force did not arrive back the UK until two to six weeks after
the hostiles had ended on the RFA Fort Austin and RFA Resource, respectfully.A PDF of the eight page MoD’s document can be
found here (link - click on the link "View the item you were looking for").In this entry, I am going to write up a bit
about these nuclear weapons, what happen with them during the conflict, and how
will this will play into my upcoming Falklands naval games (and bit more on
that too).I am hoping that anyone
playing a combined arms Falklands campaign can use this information to make a
more interesting campaign.So, what
nuclear weapons did the British have?

WE.177A nuclear depth bomb - inert

﻿According to
the MoD, they only had the WE.177A
nuclear depth bombs (NDB), or the official nomenclature, “Bomb, Aircraft, HE
600lb, MC (Medium Capacity)”To my
knowledge, the Royal Navy did not have nuclear armed torpedoes for their
submarines.The WE.177A was designed to be dropped
from either an RAF or a RN aircraft or helicopter, with either a 0.5 kt or a 10
kt warhead depending on the depth or location of the enemy forces.The WE.177A was also designed for either air
burst, ground burst, or submerge burst.
﻿

Westland Wasp carring a WE.177A

As I am only interested in discussing
the immediately availability of the NDB’s by the task force at the time of the
Falklands operation, I am limiting the following list of aircrafts capable of
delivering the NDB within the task force at that time.Those aircraft include for depth charge
attacks only: the Westland Wessex HAS.3, the Westland Wessex HUS, and the
Wessex Wasp.The Sea Harrier FAS.1 was
capable of dropping the WE.177A in laydown (parachute to delay impact),
retarded (time fuze to detonate after impact) to allow the jet more time to
escape.Also, the HMS Bristol was able
to deploy the WE.177A with its Ikara missile system.

What ships had the NDB’s?

HMS Hermes and Invincible in 1982

In the MoD’s document, they show which
ships were carrying live NDB’s, training NDB’s, and surveillance rounds.I am only interested in the live rounds for
now, so the following ships had live NDB’s assigned to them prior to sailing
for the Falklands: Invincible, Hermes,
Broadsword, Brilliant, Fort Austin, Regent, and Resource. It should be noted that the Broadsword removed her training NDB’s prior to sailing, but the
live NDB’s did set sail with her towards the Falklands.It should also be noted that these ships were
carrying a significant percent of all of the NBD’s in the Royal Navy
inventory.I will be touching on how
many in my next section.

Why did the ships not off load their
NDB’s at shore, either the UK or Ascension Islands?

There was a major argument to fully
off load the NDB’s to a safe land location would have delayed the Falklands
operations and put the time schedule in jeopardy (remember, they were in a rush
to beat the sever winter conditions which could have stopped all
operations.)The ships had only 24 hours
at port and it was determined that it would take another 36 hours more to
safely removed all of the NDB’s.This
delay could have also alerted the Argentine forces that the RN was located at
the Ascension Islands and to be better prepared for their arrival.

What happen to the NDB’s in the task
force?

According to the MoD, most of the NDB’s
were transferred at sea (by helicopter or Landing craft) to ships in the task
force with deep magazines (deep in the ship and most heavily protected from
bomb attacks.)Those ships with the deep
magazines were the following: Hermes,
Invincible, Fort Austin, and Resource.The Hermes
was the most heavily protected and it was expected that only had a moderate
chance of damage from a mine or torpedo and minimal chance from an Exocet
missile.The protection on the other
ships had a greater chance of damage from torpedoes.In the MoD’s document, it shows when and
which ships transferred their NDB’s to which specific ship with a deep
magazine.By the end of the transfers
the Hermes was carrying 40% (!) of
the entire RN’s NDB’s inventory (not the task force, the whole RN!), the
Invincible was carrying 25% (!), and
the Fort Austin and Resource was carrying even more, but not
noted.So just between the two task
force carriers, 65% of all the RN’s NBD’s was located.

What would have happen had one the
ships with the NDB’s been hit?

HMS Brillant, only ship damaged with NDB's aboard, but they were the training type

According the MoD, there would not
have been an nuclear explosion (which would be true, look at my previous entry
on my visiting of the atomic bomb site that was dropped on Mars Station,
SC.)However, there could have been
radioactive release; if the ships were still afloat, immediate decontamination
of any radioactive material and the removal of the remaining NDB’s to any of
the remain deep magazine ships; if the ship sank, the NDB’s were either
temporary or permanently lost for NATO operations, and possible recovery by
Argentine salvage operations.This is
not even including public relations nightmares for the British and could
cripple their future of having ships visit other ports.

How will this fit into a Falklands game
or campaign?

I have the rules set, Shipwreck, based
on the recommendations by Rusty Nail over at his blog, "Hurry Up and Wait!" (link) (If you are interested in the Falklands, I highly recommend it!). I also got to play it a couple of times while I was working in Savannah,
GA.I really like the system and plan to
use that for my Falklands naval campaign.I have 1/6000 ships from Hallmark that I will use, but might consider
bumping up to 1/3000.But the cost,
size, and availability of the ships used in the Falklands conflict got me to
buy the 1/6000.I am going to try to
start painting these up myself (!) over the holidays as they should be fairly
easy to paint.But I digressed from the
topic…

I am looking at a board scope for my
Falklands games and the naval action is a major part of it.First off, I am fairly confident that
Thatcher would have never authorized the use of the NDB’s during the Falklands
conflict, so the RN can’t use them for what they are designed for against the
Argentine forces.So, the first thing is
do I off-load the NDB’s at Ascension?If
I do, that means add two more days to arrive in the area of operations, plus a
greater chance of detection by the Argentine’s 707 recon plane.This will also mean a more aggressive land
operation for when I am doing that to reach Port Stanley before winter
conditions forces the operation to end.Do I remove the NDB’s to the deep magazine ships?There should be a chance to lose a NDB during
the transfer and that will cause some political loss of Victory Points to
reflect the need to go back and recover the lost NDB.If chose not to transfer, I need to keep
track of which ships have their NDB’s for possible air/submarine attacks.If a ship with NDB’s is hit, is there a
radioactive release (this will be a greater chance in a ship without a deep
magazine)?Do I have to I have to assign
helicopters to transfer the undamaged NDB’s inside of have them for a
anti-submarine screen?Needless to say,
if the Hermes is hit and sinks before
a transfer could take place, there would be a major Political loss for various
reasons. I have not figure up any hard points or rules for any of this, but
this is brain food for people to think about.

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Last weekend, Steve H. ran a game of Flames of War at the Wargamer's Cave (link). It went fairly well and I think most enjoyed themselves. The set up was an armor heavy task force of Germans was to push across the board and exit off board at a specific road point. The Germans were run by Glenn & Ravi. I am not entirely sure of the German make up, but if I am correct, Glenn was pushing a platoon of Pz IIC, a platoon of Pz 38t, and the 2ic's Pz 38t; and Ravi was pushing a platoon of Pz 38t, a platoon of of Pz IVD, a weak platoon of pioneers, and the CO in his Pz 38t. On the Russian's side, Curtis pushed a infantry platoon, 3x MMG teams, a T-28, and both the CO and 2ic; Blake was pushing a company of T-26's; and I was pushing a company of BT-7's. We had numbers, but poor armored vehicles (my BT-7's have 0 armor rating all around!) Anyway, here are some pictures from the game, plus a brief AAR with the pictures.

Steve is setting up the game. Curtis' Soviets are set up with the infantry along the road and the MMG teams and the T-28 at the bend in the road. The two Soviet tank companies start off board, but are were they are for storage until they show up. The Germans will be coming on the right table edge in the picture.

This is either turn one or two. Blake's T-26's are advancing down the road while my BT-7's are forming a battle line at the edge of the wheat fields. Due to my misunderstanding, I thought the grassy field in front of me was also rough ground preventing me from moving full speed, which is the BT-7's big edge. So I was more cautious than what I would have normally have been. The Germans on the far corner are Glenn's and the one's in the middle are Ravi's.

This is either turn two or three. There has been a round of fire between the tanks already. Blake's T-26's where trading shots with the Pz IVD's and came out the worst for it. My BT-7's lost one tank in the first round of shooting with Ravi's platoon of Pz 38t's. So I turned moved the rest of the company through the woods (luckily without bogging any tanks until the 2nd to last) so I could get wood cover for my 0 armored tanks and also prevent half of the Pz 38t platoon to get shots at me. Unfortunately, they still knocked out three more of my tanks!

Revenge! Next round I killed the only two Pz 38t's that could shoot at my BT-7's.

Blake's T-26's where wiped out shortly later and finish killing the rest of Ravi's Pz 38t's when he advanced them to a spot were they could shoot me. Glenn decides to do a Thunder Run past the MMG and the T-28 blocking force. So I pull out of the woods to try to beat Glenn to the corner.

The picture before the end. Due to the rough terrain, only two of my four remaining BT-7's can get in position to shoot at Glenn as Curtis' T-28 moves up to shoot the rear of Glenn's column. I was able to get the lead two tanks to bail and Curtis got the rear tank to bail as well. But Glenn passed his rolls to remount and was able to double move pass me for a win.In the end, the Soviets lost a full company of T-26's, a half company of BT-7's, and almost a full platoon of infantry. The Germans only lost one platoon of Pz 38t's and half of their pioneers. The one Pz IIC was bogged down behind Soviet lines, so it might have been abandoned temporary and possibly destroyed later only to be recovered by the rest of the Panzer division following on.Also going on at another table at the same time was a game by Dave S. using his homemade rules and 10mm / 1-144th figures. As I was not involved with it, I can not comment on the pictures other than it was also an Eastern Front game.

On a couple of final notes, one is that if all goes well, next Saturday I will be running another 10mm Vietnam game, but this time I will be using Flames of War's Tour of Duty instead of TFL's Charlie Don't Surf. I want to try it them out because to be brutally honest, I want a every simple game system for convention games because with only 4-5 hours to set up, tear down, explain rules, and do the game, I just don't have time to do TFL's Charlie Don't Surf justice. Plus some people can't get around the card system with TFL's games, the fact that they might not go for several card turns, or suffer the American disease (Short attention span.) Charlie Don't Surf will still be my game of choice for Vietnam with regular gamers but not for conventions.Next is that I did open my package of my painted figures to find that the mail service beat the hell out of the boxes and most of the stuff was chipped. Some has very few chips, other were really bad. I am waiting to find what paints to use for the touch up work and do the work before taking pictures of them. I have already have a plan on a better shipping method for future paint jobs.Sapper

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

This whimsical is because of Richard Clarke with the Too Fat Lardies! In a recent posting on the the TFL Yahoo Group by Richard about the upcoming Christmas Special for Too Fat Lardies, he mention that in one of the articles that there are rules for tomatoes. Now, I know that my first reaction should have been, "oh, throwing tomatoes at other gangsters for the awaited Gangster rules in this Christmas Special." But, no...my first thought was, "Cool! Rules for Killer Tomatoes!" And then the damn singing of the theme song from "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" has been on my mind ever since! You see, "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" is one of my guilty movie pleasures...and yes, I have all four movies on DVD! (And yes, I did at one time started to make some stands of Killer Tomatoes to fight my 1/300 US Army troops!) So, because of me replaying over and over the theme of Killer Tomatoes, I had to go to YouTube. While I was there I found this clip that compares Killer Tomatoes to Killer Clowns...oh, and yeah, I love "Killer Clowns from Outer Space" too!Enjoy!

Monday, November 11, 2013

Sunday, November 10, 2013

I was sitting around
work yesterday and I was thinking about my gaming projects; what to keep, what to
get rid of, etc. I started thinking
about my Kickstarter's Winter War pledge and everything I needed as I really have
nothing on the

I
think I finally figured out how to use the Google Drive to make PDF’s and other
documents available on my blog for others, without out making all of my files
accessible (Sorry folks, there are just some things I don’t want to share!)